(Original post by I do)
I am reading these posts and realising there is colonizer's blood in this nation!

Colonizing and 'putting' British people on the island does not make the island British.

If you're going to play that card then perhaps the Argentines should move back to spain. And perhaps the Americans should move back to Europe. And under this logic perhaps the fairest thing to do is for the whole of humanity to move back to Africa where it came from.

Let's not be absurd. These people were born on these islands so as far as I can see they have a right to say what happens to the place of their birth, and a right to say who rules it.

(Original post by I do)
Well, Do we challenge the idea that Britain has power over Falklands today because it was a colonizer? Did the Penguins ask Brits to go there?
The same about all the nations which claimed sovereignty they all were hunting for new territories, some of them still do have colonies.

So are you saying it's wrong for humans to ever colonise land, whether or not it's already inhabited by other humans? Does that mean we should all move back to Africa?

My main problem with colonial times was the fact that countries like Britain and France came in and subjugated or just plain massacred the natives, the people that already lived there. At best they took control over their natural resources.

The Falklands is one of the few exceptions where this did not happen because there were no native people. Unlike Argentina.

Unfortunately we can't go back and undo the past. We can't return places like the Cayman Islands back to the native Caribs because they don't really exist anymore. The best we can do is let the people that live in those places now decide what they want to do. And the British colonies that remain do so because that's what they want to do. Except Diego Garcia. What the British and the Americans did there was a disgrace.

(Original post by anarchism101)
I'd say they have more of a claim having their entire country near than the UK does because it settled a few people there a long time ago purely for the purpose of getting resources like this whose descendants happen to still be there.

Because in the 18th/19th century Explorers/settlers knew ALL about potential oil reserves buried deep beneath the surrounding seas!

Using your argument of location based claims, then the whole of Ireland should belong to the UK, who in turn, should belong to France!

The simple fact is, the only attempt made by Argentina to establish a colony was in 1832, and it was actually an attempt to create a penal settlement which ultimately failed when the prisoners revolted and the British ejected the settlement as an illegal settlement on British sovereign territory.

(I'll ignore Vernets settlement of 1828 since a: Argentina still did not exist as a country, and b: he requested permission to attempt a settlement from Buenos Aires AND Britain - thereby recognising British claims to the islands)

(Original post by anarchism101)
I'd say they have more of a claim having their entire country near than the UK does because it settled a few people there a long time ago purely for the purpose of getting resources like this whose descendants happen to still be there.

You think proximity is a legitimate reason to claim ownership of land. If this is the case why is the Island of ireland not British. Why does Japan not belong to China.

But why don't we simply invade and cease Buenos Aires and kidnap Kirshner? The Argentines are not capable of winning the world cup even with the greatest player in the history of football. So the bargain will be they give us Lionel Messi and Tevez and we give them back their president, their capital and even the Falklands(too expensive). That will save us billions and we will finally win our second world cup thanks to Messi's goals. Everyone is happy then

If you're going to play that card then perhaps the Argentines should move back to spain. And perhaps the Americans should move back to Europe. And under this logic perhaps the fairest thing to do is for the whole of humanity to move back to Africa where it came from.

Let's not be absurd. These people were born on these islands so as far as I can see they have a right to say what happens to the place of their birth, and a right to say who rules it.

I think there is a huge difference between Agentina-Spain and UK-Falklands Case!
At least Argentina is an independent state which is even recognised by Spain and Falklands is under Brits! I will not continue this point.
Self-Determination could not be 'fair' outcome but if it will be taken as a best option is an reality! However, When the country has de facto and de jure control over island and that the majority is already British, who needs the formal 'referendum'?
If you let Argentitians to move there than self-determination will have the legitimacy!

(Original post by Psyk)
So are you saying it's wrong for humans to ever colonise land, whether or not it's already inhabited by other humans? Does that mean we should all move back to Africa?

My main problem with colonial times was the fact that countries like Britain and France came in and subjugated or just plain massacred the natives, the people that already lived there. At best they took control over their natural resources.

The Falklands is one of the few exceptions where this did not happen because there were no native people. Unlike Argentina.

Unfortunately we can't go back and undo the past. We can't return places like the Cayman Islands back to the native Caribs because they don't really exist anymore. The best we can do is let the people that live in those places now decide what they want to do. And the British colonies that remain do so because that's what they want to do. Except Diego Garcia. What the British and the Americans did there was a disgrace.

Ok, the classical colonizing did not happen as people were not slaughtered and enslaved. However, the Brits were been sent there to legitimate its power over territory! the same thing happened by Russia in 20th century in Kaliningrad.
colonizing? it was an reality for that centuries, it had pros and cons but I think
since than things changed dramatically and what was taken for by military force needs to be returned back in order a historical justice to be restored.

We owe argentina nothing. They tried to take the islands by force and now trying to make us seem like the bad guys using propaganda, we have a similar issue with spain in Gibraltar but they havent tried invading. Its ridiculous people think we should even consider negotiating with an aggressive country.

You can see the childish immaturity of Argentina if you study Freud. Because Argentina is angry at itself, it blames other people. For instance, it flies people out to Antarctica to try and have Native Antarcticans in a stupid attempt to take control of the continent. They then accuse us of moving people to the Falklands to take control. I don't get it, are they feeling inadequate?

What are they going to do with the Falklands? Move everyone British out and try and set up a mirror community of Argentinians? It's really pathetic.